While I don't have the same ('it's all the fauilt of Labour, the trendy liberals') attitude that you do, I do feel negative about this. It seems like a cynical piece of ill-thought populism, to me, to select these names, and it's a needless and pointless jettisoning of tradition, which should (in general) be carefully maintained.
Moreover, the whole subject of carriers and JSF could only depress the sensible observer, for a number of reasons.
The Carriers are going to be hugely expensive and will lead to the loss of much more important (but less politically visible) capabilities.
Too many people have been taken in by specious and spurious arguments about the supposed usefulness of carriers.
If we need carriers, we need three of them.
JSF is deeply mired, and has suffered alarming weight growth, cost escalation and other technical difficulties, and as an autonomous stand alone platform lacks key capabilities.
People haven't picked up on the aircraft's weaknesses, and the problems any operator will have who do not possess the air power 'infrastructure' which the US can take for granted (F-22s, offboard sensors like AWACS, JSTARS and RJ).
JSF won't be good enough for British industry or for the UK taxpayer, because the right to bid is far from being the same as proper workshare or offset, even though we do (as the only Level splat partner) actually have some guaranteed participation.
Apart from that, I suppose it's a subject which cheers me up.......